firstR8

I've been reading about the R8 Diesel and journalists have said that the R8 needs more power. I take it none of them have ever driven one. Since when has 0-60 in under 4 seconds and 200 mph been slow?

JohnLZ7W

The R8 does 0-60 in under 4 seconds?

firstR8

This is directly from Motor Trend:

.....Simultaneously the V1 explodes in a Ka-band eruption just as Vance shouts, "Cop!" I engage each of the R8's 24 brake pistons and bring the car down to 60 but, as the JERK turns around, I know it's too late. "That JERK waited to flip on his radar," I tell Brian in my defense. Uninterested in our mission and indifferent to the R8's capabilities, the JERK cites me, lightening my wallet by $153. And just to kill me with kindness, he says, "This is a beautiful car." I'm tempted to show the JERK just how beautifully the R8 can blaze from 0 to 60 in 3.9 seconds and through the quarter mile in 12.5 at nearly 112 mph, but I instead thank him and move on.
[Source: Motor Trend]

firstR8

http://www.motortrend.com/features/travel/112_0707_2008_audi_r8/concept_to_production.html

beach5

These numbers are quite impressive. I wonder why there are so many people who say that this car should be fitted with a V10...the V8 seems to be doing the trick.

JohnLZ7W

I missed that, had only seen the 4.2 (or whatever it was) estimates. Quite impressive

firstR8

My Porsche hates 0-60 launches - so much chatter in the driveline and bucking. I predict tht Audi will NOT offer a V10, even though some Audi execs have mentioned it. Frankly, there's no need to make more power but 100kg less weight would be nice. The exhaust system and the interior could be places where weight could be saved.

20C4S

the reality is, it's not fast by today's standard. i still like it cuz it's different.

blk 2.7Tpsk

Having driven/owned a number of Audi quattro cars, including the RS6, they are insanely quick off the line.

Once underway however, the car is RELATIVELY slow in straight line acceleration when compared to comparably priced sports cars. 112 mph trapspeed in the quarter mile is not great, and slower than any of it's major competitors, even lower priced cars such as the Porsche 911S, the standard Corvette, and the E90 M3. It's quite a bit slower than my heavy 5 passenger luxury sedan.

Lots of people, including me, would have liked to see a bit more power/weight ratio.

Sarge

More weight WOULD hurt, so they have a tough decision, but I think the V10tt or V12 'tdi' would make for a good flagship.

I don't think it would steal many Gallardo sales, the cars are too different in their demeanor.

It's certainly not the case that the R8 is slow, and it is extremely driveable re lap times, so there's no question it's fast.

However, to get squarely on top of the game, to be ahead of the other alternatives in this league, it needs another 100 or so horses.

A more powerful car would certainly be more expensive, in the $150k range, but it would compete with cars in that price range as well (well-optioned 911 turbo, F430, Continental GT, Aston's new flagship, etc.)

The R8 fits well in the '911 C4S' space, a more powerful R8 would be a good fit at the top of the charts. Well, the rung below the Veyron, which I would say is for the forseeable future, THE top rung.

I wouldn't take people's wishes for 'more power' as anything but a compliment; a lot of people see this car as a superior vehicle to the F430 and all the others as a well-sorted, reliable daily driver, and think (like most of us) that with a little more juice, it would trump them at their own very powerful games.

Depending on your wants/needs, it already does. But if you want the same visceral push in the back you get from some of those more powerful cars, especially at triple digit speeds where power is the only way to overcome wind resistance, you simply need more power.

You can diminish weight a tad, but as speeds rise, you need to generate down force, which implies wind resistance, and all the carbon fibre in the world can't surmount that resistance. You just need more power.